Jump to content

Telpar

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1412

About Telpar

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia
  1. Telpar

    Fridays patch is 'not' OBT....

    This game much less relies on the "know the damn map". In WOT you have to die at almost every place of the map, know every angle, every bush; I mean that map knowledge plays a great part part of your success or failure. Just remember when you have a TD and start on a mp you do not know. In Warships this is really not a problem. Some maps are special, but you don't have any "I am spotted!" surprise, "I am dead" one sec later. This is really a STRONG point of Warships. I don't like dying all over in WOT just because I took a few weeks break and have to learn new maps for a long time. I don't like having to move to a place to find out if there are angles of LOS everywhere to learn and no time to learn them. It is possible to play maps on training mode though to fix that ... ;) In any case, this is an advantage for Warships.
  2. Telpar

    CVs and backwardsness

    @ genai: It's the XP reward you should target then. As I mentioned in another thread, they should add more XP/credit for damage dealt at closer range, for damage repaired too with your skills. That is a way to reward BBs playing as such. Having a system only rewarding damage is currently wrong. But that certainly doesn't mean damage shall be equal among classes and situations. You can't take balancing "as a whole" by adding every single possible complaining thing to it. Like adding the way a BB or a CV can turn, their speed, their stealth, their style, and how they get countered. Split the things up. OP does this by mentioning aircrafts speed and manoeuvrability. He is right imo. You think T10 CVs get too much XP/credits for their damage? that can get easily addressed, as far as our ideas can get. And what OP mentions will also go in that direction. I am more worried by the fact that ideas here won't be addressed actually, but that's another problem.
  3. Telpar

    Your combat role - Pay attention to it please

    Very accurate. +1 We need experience/rewards for: - shooting aircrafts - the range at which you deal the damage (closer range = more exp) - a few experience for taking gun damage, or maybe rather for the amount of hps you repair with repair skills (that will reward BBs which support the team more) BBs should then be at an advantage using their main strengths for the team, just as CAs. I don't know why WG game designers did not bring this.
  4. Telpar

    CVs and backwardsness

    Please. That is not a good comparison. Please forget that line of thoughts. CAs and BBs take hits. They take aggro and damage, and you have to add the damage a BB took (or fire sent its way) to the damage it dealt to understand how it helped its team as a whole. It's as if you said that a tank in a MMORG should deal as much damage as the team magician for the classes to be balanced. To give an opinion to the original post: This is an excellent writing, and I agree with your post. Aircrafts should not be so nimble and something must be done regarding T10 aircrafts.
  5. Telpar

    IJN CV Line impressions

    Thank you Ishiro, I feel that it was a great feedback. I do not say that only because I agree, I really like this kind of commitment. +1 ! I especially like the high risk / high reward described; playing japanese CV was the best "drug" I got before the patch. Now it's lower risk / much, much lower reward, esp when lower tier; nothing quite interesting, and not a role I could identify myself into.
  6. Telpar

    Japanese CVs - Your stats post-patch

    Thanks! That raised my interest! I would have many interested questions about the Taiho but that could be another topic entirely. We'll see what happens to our T4-T8 japanese CVs too. Their planes have less survival chances overall so they might be more affected.
  7. Another thread about Japanese CVs - but I would like that one to concentrate on facts and stats. That's the purpose of beta. For the ones who played their japanese CVs just a few battles post-patch, please post here your average stats and last battle stats. If you can provide a short situation description, it's good, otherwise do without it. Two words on your presonal conclusion is also only a bonus. Two games post-patch may be enough guys, it seems significant. And thanks a lot. I am sure it would help. Myself: Hiryu (T7) Pre-patch: Average damage is 57K, top damage 160K. Post-patch: - one game at 17k. Long duration. Target was on a solo Fuso BB. 6 squadron waves on it. - one game at 25k. Target was on a solo North Carolina BB. 9 squadron waves on it. No plane survived after their drops (the BB AA). Conclusion: I had perfect targets for my class. (except that North Carolina BB was T8). It is enough for me to know I am no longer useful to anything for my team. And a CV can't help the team by taking hits unlike a BB, so it needs damage. I'll play other ships now.
  8. Telpar

    OMG - WTF have they just done to CV..unbelievable

    I see. This sure is an example of a bad CA escort. CAs can actually be screens, as they should, and screens are not just near a BB but several kms from it. As such, they screen also vs DDs. I understand ranges do not seem to fit at first glance, but on the scene it works. However my CA experience is T6, my CV and BB experience is T7. I've seen how the game and roles evolved on T6+ and I wonder if they do on T8+. Maybe my experience needs more battles on that part! To get back to topic: I am really surprised to see WG reacts to the japanese CV damage rate. As japanese CV, I did have a high damage output, but I observe that as a BB (Nagato, T7), I do less damage but can endure the enemy fire. A good game in CV: when you dealt more than 100k damage. (that includes indirect damage) A good game in BB: when you dealt 80k damage and endured 80k damage or so. You could go to your top 160k damage on your CV, but maybe that BB which took hits too saved the team just as well. So... halving the CV damage (looking at the spread I suppose it would halve it) would actually make them so less useful that I understand current reactions. As I said we need to play more though. What are your CV post-patch experience? We had only a few so far who played, many are saying they are canceling their CV.
  9. Telpar

    OMG - WTF have they just done to CV..unbelievable

    Genai, why do you say good CAs were not escorting BBs ? When I play a Cleveland, I love how AA can hamper the enemy torp runs, so sometines team up with CAs and BBs, and when I play a CV, I always look for the targets which * do not * have a cruiser near it.
  10. Telpar

    OMG - WTF have they just done to CV..unbelievable

    As a fact Abraa: We CVs do not even care of we can hit a DD better or not with this torp spread. Some will, but most will not care about that thing. Because that's not our role, that's not our job, let's move to the other things a game that a CV actually does. Yourself, you could watch what planes do to see what will happen, how they position in advance, and turn toward them. I have 130 games as DD and that's something that already works even with not many games. It's just that pursuing a fleeing CV, or ANY fleeing ship (even fleeing BBs), is not a point. Because other ships have a good speed as well. So that example too is moot. Let's get back to the real thing. CVs torping BBs. CVs torping CAs (which was already costly since T6) ---> something they only do, as well, as a desperate action to get later hits on BBs.
  11. Telpar

    OMG - WTF have they just done to CV..unbelievable

    I agree with Captain Sam. Were DDs the cause of a nerf, and is this thread about them after all? Are DDs sad today? A DD would now have much more chance to destroy a CV. That's absolute truth. I dare say "why not" ; dive bombers are more adapted vs a DD, and as far as I know these were not nerfed. So that's okay. DDs were not the target of a CV anyway. Let's drop that "my DD experience" thing here. Let's speak about CVs chances to do something important in a whole game. Players should bring out their average DMG after patch, and before patch, to get an idea. One of the whole points of this CBT is balance. Regarding game experience though, I believe it was hit a strong bit. And that's important too. Let's see how this tuns out if we give it time - but we have no reason to be that positive here. For me players needed to learn to play as a fleet to counter CVs, and it seems that WG decided otherwise. Seems that WG decided it was he other way around at least to be protected from japanese CVs ; 4 torps only remember. We'll adapt, we'll test that out, but I see nothing positive here. Considering the gameplay was superb before, it might end up as a serious drawback.
  12. Telpar

    OMG - WTF have they just done to CV..unbelievable

    About DDs Guys, DDs were already a really a hard target to hit, and never were something you could easily hit with torpedo planes; even with two waves synchronized. You could, but mostly if you are good and he got a bit distracted, as you can see how the planes position themselves to do that "doubled drop". Also, a CV targeting a DD won't actually help his team as much; targeting a DD is usually the last thing he does, desperately to cancel a capture or mostly to try saving himself. A DD against a CV will win the fight 3 times out of 4, vs a good CV player, and I won't even speak of other carrier players. Also remember that a DD can spot a CV and get it killed all the same. Edit: And yes, I got torped by CVs as a DD too, I am not a great DD player, but even for me I can win a CV vs DD duel, when playing a DD, most of the time. About CVs There really is an issue when carriers can only provide a moderate support even if well played. I mean that even against good CVs, there are already a number of secondary items such as AA, that make it so that on upper tiers, even two or three BBs cruising together (as they should) can destroy by AA anything a CV can send at them. Players can protect themselves with other fleet members. And I won't even speak of CAs. They can escort any target the CV would have. And do I need to speak of the enemy CV? He can protect targets with its fighters. And would I speak about evasion? ships turn fast and can avoid most hits. And that's the point of the whole game - only "solo " ships could become easy targets for CVs. We were really far from an arty gameplay: Players were not playing as a fleet, leading to a better CV damage. Especially on japanese CVs, since their higher number of squadrons were more attractive to more experienced players (many more things to manage, olus the fact that your fighters are weaker). Now japanese CVs got a big nerf, and what I do not like is the way it punishes skill and makes things less interesting. @ Abraa: As if you would know how easy that is by playing from a Tier IV Langley? That is the only one in your profile, so use you closed beta to actually play more CVs instead of 8 battles on a poor one that led you to see how they behave. My point above stands, a DD will win 3 times out of 4 vs a CV, even alone and even against a good CV. So that was not a real issue.
  13. Telpar

    A CV players two biggest enemies

    I have observed the amazing american BBs turn-rate, and most cruisers too, and would understand how CV players can get more than a bit disgusted by that. I have no problem since I learnt to manually drop bombs (although even this will fail with half the targets), but can understand the problem players have with it. AI should be fixed regarding dropping torps on islands (thus never reaching water). Having "shift" for switching view and for setting waypoints also leads to ill behavior. But the main problem is also with how a CV player experience can change depending on the tiers he fights. Most ships above its tier have an AA that really go beyond his aircrafts capabilities and hitpoints. And the same goes for fighters one tier above it, as they really insta-kill whatever he launches. I suspect there is a "tier capability modifier" somewhere that goes well above what other ships can do to other tier ships. CVs are not underpowered though - once mastered, they can do really awesome damage - but I would say the experience can get odd for some time. Especially the US BBs turn rate - amazing but also really unbelievable. At least there are other ships to torp.
  14. Telpar

    NERF % chance of fires on HE shells!

    AP no longer works the same way, we know it, and many cruisers can't hit a BB now even with AP, so they use more HE. HE has become very effective - true enough! but AP was too powerful before. HE and fire is a problem for Battleships - true enough! But when I see posts with Battleships "fleeing" cruisers, and then complaining of the way they got hit so many times at 12-15 kms, instead of getting closer to the cruiser so they could get an accurate hit on it or use their secondary guns, I also see the situational problem is also with our BBs captainship. (edit : I would rather understand more the cruiser which flees the battleship - as told with the Des Moines story above ) The fire chances are from 5 percent to 16 percents per hit, for hits which actually damage the ship (yes, I've got HE confirmed hits without damage at times). A cruiser will set you in fire in two nice salvos. By the time you hit it, you will be on fire. But then, you can ruin its life with one well placed salvo. A Yamato burning with 3 fires and 1k / second? Not so dire, as it also has its hp-recovery skill too, and a freaking 100k HP - and I would guess a cruiser which tries to get that on a Yamato might have some problems of its own to consider. It is also very costly to get bomb hits and fire on that. Think that it is a fleet game. HE could get a slight nerf, but reducing fire chances to 4 to 12 percent (instead of 5 to 16) could be enough to be more balanced, and honestly I do not think that will change your personal experience and fire episodes by much. Edit : Wanted to say, you get a point with cruisers ability, but I expect only a slight nerf on that field.
  15. Telpar

    Look son it's a Draw!

    I approve Picobyte's post. Also, my draw rate myself is 5 percent, which is still ways more than WOT's 1-2 percent, but I don't think it will get much higher than that. In most cases I saw, the team that got the highest number of kills (and not the victory) only had it because they focused on one area of the battlefield and did not control the map in any way. They just kept their cannons in the back, in other words, and shot the attackers when they got close, but did not do anything good. Sleepers asleep should not get their cake when they wake up so late.
×